dslreports logo
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
Palladium: Safer Computing or World Domination?
Should Microsoft be responsible for security?
by hurleyp 11:02AM Friday Jun 28 2002 Tipped by Karl Bode See Profile
There has been a great deal of buzz in the tech media this week about Palladium, Microsoft's new long term project that yearns to fundamentally change the architecture of the PC with the stated goal of improving security. With partners like AMD and Intel already signed on to the project, Microsoft pundits see this as the final step toward complete domination of the technological landscape by Ballmer and company.

What happens when one of the world's largest software manufacturers releases plans via a glowing mainstream news outlet article to develop an entirely new architecture designed to improve security? What if that company is Microsoft, consistently known to be one of the least security conscious companies over the last decade?

The idea is this: This new architecture would see a new security chip used for encryption added to PCs (and other devices), along with new APIs (Application-Program Interfaces) designed to let applications to be written to take advantage of Palladium. Palladium may also cover chipsets, graphics processors and USB (Universal Serial Bus) input/output systems, according to Mario Juarez, group product manager for the content security business unit at Microsoft, in this infoworld article. The Palladium technology would paste a digital certificate on every byte of data and PC on the web, then encrypt the data on the processor level. Some media outlets are assuming Palladium is the code name for a new Microsoft OS, but it's obviously a much broader initiative.

It's a somewhat scary proposition, even by those who generally don't hate Microsoft. The web has sprung up with no shortage of critics for the new technology, this commentary by ZDNET standing as a fairly standard reaction to the new plan. Others like Robert Cringely go into a bit more detail, poking at the shiny exterior to get to the real goal of the technology. Once Cringely gets done being impressed with himself, he makes a frightening point that Microsoft's true goal is to replace TCP/IP with a "more secure" MS designed protocol.

Cringley goes on to suggest that the best way to trick consumers into switching to the new protocol, would be to release a flurry of TCP/IP exploits onto the web, faulting current technology for the security lapse, and shortly thereafter announcing "a better way". Cringely is obviously on one side of the see-saw of opinion, but take a brief tour of the Palladium coverage on the web, and you'll see he's certainly not alone.

The question exists then: Perhaps a new security architecture IS a good idea, but is Microsoft the company that should be developing it? Microsoft's track record of shifty behavior isn't getting any cleaner. The most recent example is a Microsoft triggered raid of a game development house named Mindark. Microsoft urged local Sweden court officials to raid the software developer looking for rogue, unlicensed copies of Microsoft products. At first glimpse this seems like simply protecting your own, until you realize that Mindark is the developer behind a promising Multiple Player on-line gaming venture known as Project Entropia, which may threaten Microsoft's own on-line game Asheron Call.

The raid on Mindark occurred two months ago, but the company released the news yesterday as they announced they were planning to sue the company for damages caused by their action, according to Wired News. The safer, kinder, and more secure Microsoft pushed by Steve Ballmer a few months ago has so far yet to materialize.

The problem companies like Microsoft face when they have their hands into so many technological pots, is that it's almost impossible not to be accused of conflict of interest. Palladium however, is quite a bit broader and intrusive than anything attempted before, bringing big name companies on board to create a new elite cyber-club developed technology standard that will fundamentally change computing. Anyone who doesn't agree with the standard could find themselves on the outside looking in. Open source, Linux variants, and Apple could easily be left in the cold (ok, further out in the cold). Take a look at this Register article that examines fears of how the technology could eradicate GPL.

At the end of the day it will be a tough sell for the boys in Redmond. Trust in Microsoft within the internet community isn't exactly brimming over. The global community isn't thrilled by an American created standard either, as noted by the New York Times. Palladium will likewise be an increasing target for privacy advocates and critics of the RIAA, as the technology offers extensive digital rights management features. Features that can be sold as spam killers, but also utilized to control and contain digital media.

A tough sell may just be the understatement of the century.

view:
topics flat nest 
amoiseyev
Went For Beer

join:2000-11-14
Worcester, MA

M$ want more M$$

This is just one more M$ trick to force people to buy new OS and new computers. It is not going to stop spam, hackers, piracy and p2p, but it will make much more difficult to legitimate users to utilize their "fair use" rights. And it will cost users a lot of extra money, eat much more computer power and give M$ much more control for what user does on the computer.

I would rather say it's against privacy, not for safety.
--
Alex
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. - Murphy's law

SAM Hunter$

join:2001-05-11
USA

Re: M$ want more M$$

I have used all the MS Windows from 3.1 to XP and although XP is not perfect I think it is good OS, far and away the best in their line. They make many fine products although none are perfect and some of those imperfections are a result of irresponsibility of MS and some are just a result of no one is perfect. I've use many if not most of them.

Although MS is guilty of a great deal of what they are criticized for and prosecuted in court for they are also separately unfairly piled on, criticized in certain areas, and politically persecuted and lied about. A mixed bag.

But one thing for sure is in my opinion is they are habitual liars and overall usually don't deal in good faith. They just practice crisis management and spin.

The bottom line is you can't trust or put a lot of believe in anything they say. Anything. That doesn't mean they are lying all the time but neither are they telling the truth. To them business is war. A total don't take prisoners war that they will do or say whatever is necessary to win, whether it is lie or tell the truth. Whichever they conclude will serve their needs at the time.

[text was edited by author 2002-06-28 14:08:30]

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:44

Re: M$ want more M$$

All very true.

I'm not really a specific MS hater. I'm generally a corporation hater in general.

But I don't believe that MS is right for this job....and I don't like their ulterior motives.
--
Palpatine for Senate

SAM Hunter$

join:2001-05-11
USA

Re: M$ want more M$$

Ditto!

CFeicht4

join:2000-09-01
Oley, PA
"I'm generally a corporation hater in general."

You shouldn't be, if you like working.
--
"The Constitution of the United States is not a suicide pact." ---Andrew Jackson

SAM Hunter$

join:2001-05-11
USA

Re: M$ want more M$$

said by CFeicht quoting Leviathan:
"I'm generally a corporation hater in general." CFeicht's reply: "You shouldn't be, if you like working."
I wouldn't presume to speak for Leviathan but I suspect he more accurately means he hates the way many if not most large corporations do business and how they treat their employees.

CFeicht4

join:2000-09-01
Oley, PA

Re: M$ want more M$$

If that's what he meant then I retract, but it didn't look that way to me.

jer2

join:2001-01-16
Dearborn Heights, MI
Corporations are not the only ways to get work. I work for a small (3 man at the moment) company. Our job? Tell big corps how slow and wasteful their stovepiped structure has made their business, essentially...

It's a very generalized view of the world to indicate that corporations are necessary for employment...and it's an incorrect generalization.

CFeicht4

join:2000-09-01
Oley, PA

Re: M$ want more M$$

Well, maybe I should have been more clear.

BUSINESSES (which includes corporations) are necessary for the little guy to work. Nothing general about that.
--
"The Constitution of the United States is not a suicide pact." ---Andrew Jackson

xpbx
220, 221, Whatever It Takes.
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Reviews:
·Shaw
·Verizon FiOS
it is seeming to me that the more i read this, i come to the conclusion that they(MS) realize there is much more money doing this to make sure the other huge corporations that have the bazillion dollar bank accounts have to give MS the money for this new platform. they know the consumer wont buy this unless forced, so they will take this and lobby the hell out of it and cram this down our throats too. how ironic is it that a company bent on eliminating unlicensed( read unpaid, illegal) copies of their software from the marketplace has devised a way for huge record companies and the riaa and the mpaa to protect what they own too? so i for one have enough spare parts lying around to keep my box humming for a looooooooooong time. this sounds like another evil plan by the people in redmond, otherwise known as the borg.
--
"so you say you want revolution?"-Lennon/McCartney
xrobertcmx
Premium
join:2001-06-18
Sterling, VA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
said by Lost in Space:
I have used all the MS Windows from 3.1 to XP and although XP is not perfect I think it is good OS, far and away the best in their line.
Most of that sounded good, but I have to disagree with the above statement. 2K was much better.

SAM Hunter$

join:2001-05-11
USA

Re: M$ want more M$$

said by Linuvas:
Most of that sounded good, but I have to disagree with the above statement. 2K was much better.
I agree 2k is a great OS and it came out of the box with less glitches and patches needed than XP. So in that regard it is currently better. But XP should correct that with the appropriate service patch. Remember in terms of design function 2k was designed more for an upgrade or replacement of NT instead of the 95/98/Me family.

The only problem with 2k is its relatively limited or weak hardware support (it tends to like the newer and high end hardware) and it lack of home or consumer software support. For instance forget about gaming specifically and many other home type software.

However, if you are a business with high end or relatively new hardware all around AND you don't want to learn XP's new and different interface 2K is a great choice! However, MS is no doubt not going to pump much if any improvements and upgrade into 2k but XP instead has they see XP as the bridge between and replacement for all previous OS programs. So MS in that respect will eventually functionally kill off support for 2000 as well as NT and so on.

But as far as what is the best OS it is just a matter of what the user's need are. But no doubt 2k is great.

[text was edited by author 2002-06-28 19:46:44]
xrobertcmx
Premium
join:2001-06-18
Sterling, VA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: M$ want more M$$

said by Lost in Space:
The only problem with 2k is its relatively limited or weak hardware support (it tends to like the newer and high end hardware) and it lack of home or consumer software support. For instance forget about gaming specifically and many other home type software.
That is an interesting concept. I've used 2K and XP. I've had more hardware support issues with XP. My DVD Drive won't work in DMA, and there is no fix, but it worked fine in 2K.
Also the interface on XP is nearly the same, or at least instictual if you have used windows, not to mention that I set it to classic.
And I think you are right in that MS will kill off 2K, even though sales of 2K will remain higher then XP for another year.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:44
Aren't they essentially the same technology with slightly modified GUI's?
--
Palpatine for Senate

SAM Hunter$

join:2001-05-11
USA

Re: M$ want more M$$

said by Leviathan:
Aren't they essentially the same technology with slightly modified GUI's?

Yes to the GUI but a totally different code or "technology". I am a lightweight intermediate in computers but the general lightweight answer to your question is that Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows XP have has some type of foundation element in their code known as a kernel which depending upon the type is THE key to stability and indirectly how smart you can make the OS and how much demands you can put on it. Windows 95/98/Me were not on the same kernel or foundation code. So, that is why inherently they always have applications crash, or Windows freezes or the infamous blue screen of death.

With XP I have not had a single lock up, freeze, or blue screen of death since I got it about six months ago. And I use it a lot. I am on the computer at least 8 and not unusual 12 hours a day. Been online continuously since 9 AM so far. Also, if you do have an individual program under XP crash you can just "end task" and it will not effect anything else on your computer. Sometimes you then can just restart the previously "end task" program it will come back up okay. That sure wasn't the way with 95/98/Me. XP is also is a lot more powerful, (with the requisite memory and CPU demands), and smarter. A whole Lot smarter.

I am sure there are about 100,000 other DSLR members who will if they see your post give you a more detailed and precise explanation.

Hope this was some help.

[text was edited by author 2002-06-29 00:27:40]
xrobertcmx
Premium
join:2001-06-18
Sterling, VA
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: M$ want more M$$

said by Lost in Space:
Yes to the GUI but a totally different code or "technology". I am a lightweight intermediate in computers but the general lightweight answer to your question is that Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows XP have has some type of foundation element in their code known as a kernel which depending upon the type is THE key to stability and indirectly how smart you can make the OS and how much demands you can put on it. Windows 95/98/Me were not on the same kernel or foundation code. So, that is why inherently they always have applications crash, or Windows freezes or the infamous blue screen of death.
That's interesting. My understanding was that 95/98/ME shared similar Kernals, and that 2K was a new OS built from the ground up off of NT technology. I know that NT/2K/XP all share the same file system NTFS or at least support for it, and that XP was built off of 2K.

RainWind-Work

@170.xx.78.indigital.
Yes, of course. Now only pirates and hackers will be able to use their computers. Sorry all you people who like doing things the legit and legal ways, you are no longer allowed to surf the internet or have fun with your computer. You must now spend 13 hours a day working in word or excel, and then you may spend 5 minutes going to msn, but not dslreports, since they aren't 100% "Microsoft Friendly", so of course if they aren't "Microsoft Friendly" they can't be secure. :P

JTC
Always Mount A Scratch Monkey

join:2002-01-09
USA

Wow, did I call this one!

Not even a month goes by, and look what happens.

(See »Microsoft Criticizes Hollywood for reference, make sure to scroll down and read all the comments)

And people still defend this company? So, what happened to the stance of doing this will slow down computers?

Pot - kettle - black as sin
--
*NIX sysadmin for hire (PLEASE!), have root, will travel.

Blizzard0

join:2000-06-27
Beverly Hills, CA

Re: Wow, did I call this one!

ohhh so it took them a month to read your post and steal your information??? come on man you knew they would use hardware becuase the software end of it would slow down the os and increase cpu and ram needs. plus the hardware is alot harder to reverse engineer then software.
--
I too was a attbi hater but now with this new service my connection is to slow to complain ...
kenyg

join:2001-02-09
Hatboro, PA

Palladium

Bad bad bad thing - if this happens.

RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
kudos:1

Instead of Credit Bureau...

...you will have a Security Bureau. And we know how screwed up credit reports can get, it is scary to think what microsoft could (would?) do to your security profile.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time.
vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD

woah woah woah woah woah

Computer illiterate but yet technology law making politicians I thought were as bad as it would come. Now I love Microsoft just as much as the next guy, but them making and owning not only the software, but the hardware and the protocols? Nah this is getting to be too much.

Microsoft needs to get broken up, easier said than done but it is getting way too hard to do somethings without microsoft. I dont like this one bit. They should break microsoft up and the the newer smaller companies manage their own thing like one for hardware and another for software.

Meee

@ttu.edu

Re: woah woah woah woah woah

Instead of breaking Microsoft up in the method indicated, either just plain disband the company altogether (IT'S STILL A BLINKIN' MONOPOLY!) Or kill off the OS portion. Face it, if the OS were started from the ground up on an altogether different, yet compatible (app. compatible that is) standpoint, the thing would be even better. Make it more like Linux (since that's open source) under the hood. Of course, eliminate Outlook and IE, as well as MP, or better yet, just take the named apps and revert them to the point in time when they were most stable, and above all else, SECURE, then reload only non-security breaking features.
Anyway, thats just my 2 cents worth without forethought.

Blizzard0

join:2000-06-27
Beverly Hills, CA

Re: woah woah woah woah woah

if you are looking for these things get linux or unix.

leave ms be it's their business what they wanna do. If their programmers are good enuff to make top notch software and protocols in house let's see em tested in real world conditions then make a decision.

point is if you want security get unix/linux if you want useability you get windows or mac
--
I too was a attbi hater but now with this new service my connection is to slow to complain ...

GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Indianapolis, IN

Wrong way to go....



Every vendor has a duty to provide high quality, secure applications. While Microsoft's "new" efforts to start incorporating more security into their apps is a good thing, this is not the way to go about it.

No one company should be the ones responsible for developing any new "standards" which so obviously are designed to benefit them and them alone.

What I don't think Microsoft quite understands, is that should Cringley et al's predictions come true, and MS tries to replace TCP with "something else" which is supposed to be more secure, and they end up in an even greater world domination stance, they will most certainly place themselves in further danger of being highly regulated.

Ever see "The Net".....there was one company that everyone trusted as the only way to go for security....and it turned out to be a sham. Now this may be a glorified example, but IMHO it isn't all that unbelievable. I think something like that could, or perhaps in some ways already has - happened.

While they are including several other vendors in this -- the usual suspects like Intel and AMD of course, I certainly see some underlying issues here that start to get a bit too "HAL" like for me.

Only time will tell, but I think the prudent path is one of caution.

K.


--
The slackjaw gaze of true profanity, feels more like surrender than defeat - If culture is the curse of the thinking class
RUSH "Ceiling Unlimited" 2002

xpbx
220, 221, Whatever It Takes.
Premium
join:2000-11-08

Re: Wrong way to go....

so true. life imitates art this time.

richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith

NO WAY!!!!!!!!!

Have Microsoft basically in charge of my hardware? The first thing they would do is make sure their stuff worked the best & everybody else's so-so. They wouldn't stop other peoples software from working, it would just work like crap,
no matter how well it was written.

As for security - forget it. I'm not really into it, but from the little I know, microsoft's security sucks!

The only way this might be ok is if microsoft was split up - hardware, operating systems & application software. The, and only then maybe, maybe, MAYBE this might work [but I don't think so!]

hurleyp

join:2000-06-20
Ottawa, ON
Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed

Correction!

The byline for this article on Palladium says that I (hurleyp) wrote the article. This is wrong. I submitted the link to an article by Robert X. Cringely over at »www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulp ··· 627.html

Paul
(I wish I could write that well. )
TheGuru9

join:2002-03-22
Greeneville, TN

The TCP/IP Explots are very true...

Windows 2000 and Windows XP are two of the latest operating systems to come from Microsoft. Both of which contain a raw socket core. This means that a decently experienced programmer can exploit TCP packets. This has been a feature that I personal hated since it came out and couldn't figure out why they did it. I guess now I do. Basically you can create a library in c++ that more or less allows you to forge any aspect of outgoing packets. For example you can forge the IP headers source which will allow you to spoof your IP address. More or less means that you can hack people and the IP address they see appear to be coming from somewhere else.

Now you take that information and go to attack someone. You can forge your IP address to the person you are wanting to attack and request services from routers, servers, etc and they will respond which will flood out the server/computer being attacked. When you spread that out over thousands of routers, servers, etc it makes it impossible to trace. With this system as you can imagine, you can really bounce those packets silly off of things.

That combined with the new vs.net I would not be very surprised to see a flood of these types of programs. Most of your kiddy scripters like to use vb cuz its so simple. They gave them so much power in that language its almost dangerous. They have enough power in that language now to get around firewalls undetected imo.

It makes sense and IMO this has been planed out for a very long time. They more then likely had this idea planed when they created 2000 and xp.
--
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most!

Daniel
Premium,MVM
join:2000-06-26
San Francisco, CA
Reviews:
·webpass.net

Raw Sockets...

Ok, all your points are pretty much valid, but the problem with your logic is that there have been free operating systems that have as much or more power available for download for years. All of the *nix products are able to do this very same thing and they are available for free right off the internet.

So, if your argument is that it was never available before, you are mistaken because of all of the *nix products mentioned above. If you think it is dangerous because it is on Windows, you are mistaken too because it isn't all that much easier to do this kind of programming in Windows than it is in Linux or some other *nix OS. The people who are now able to do it in Windows were always able to do it, so it doesn't change anything. Other people are simply not able to do it, so they don't matter anyway.

In short, this doesn't change much, if anything.
--
"Opportunities multiply as they are seized." - Sun Tzu

MJI1084$
Geekie Teen Techie
Premium
join:2001-11-10
Pensacola, FL

Ugh!

I tell you.. I am already PO'ed at Microsoft for many reasons. If this Palladium thing happens, I will no longer be a PC user. The way I picture the Palladium, is that it's a middle man between you and your computer. It makes sure everything you do is yours and is legel. Do you have any idea what this will mean?! You open a program and it will make sure it's yours and crap... Do you have any idea how much CPU power that will take?! Windows XP is already a CPU and RAM hog as it is! If this does happen, I will no longer be a PC User. I will go to strictly Macintosh. Mac OS X is awesome, Becasue it can run Macintosh software and most Linux based software. You may say "Why not just stay with PC and use Linux?!" Well, that will not disable the Palladium, and microsoft may even set it up where it will cause your computer not to run it, plus just the idea of Microsoft having a chip in my computer! Who KNOWS what they can program into that thing! They could even have it setup to remote desktop and watch what you are doing at all times!! This idea really drives me insane, i will not let microsoft run my life..... ever!
--
"This is a Unix system. I know this." - Lex. (Jurassic Park)
-Michael Imlay
-Pensacola, FL
-GCWH.NET
-MJI1084(at)COX.NET
Expand your moderator at work

Subaru
1-3-2-4
Premium
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT
kudos:1

Re: Ugh!

I really don't care what os I use.. Why? Because say we all move over to Linux tommrow or something then their is bound to be problems.. software wont run and whatnot..
MessianicJew

join:2002-05-06
Saint Louis, MO

Vive la resistance!

If this happens, there will, no doubt, be a run on any old hardware and software. People will start setting up private LANs and WANs. Of course, this will probably be considered illegal as it would be deemed subversive or, perhaps, even terrorism.

Will there be an underground? What would it be good for? People using illicit emails? Perhaps with IPv6, any non-Palladium traffic will automatically be given lowest possible priority. Assuming, of course, that IPv6 isn't scrapped as others have suggested might happen.

So what happens when every common device is online? Will your refrigerator stop working if you refuse to upgrade to Windows XP3? What about the locks on your home - will you find yourself forcibly locked out/in if you badmouth the politicians that Microsoft owns? Are they going to lock you up for using (or even worse, creating!) GPL and Copyleft software?

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105

big brother MS

Oh, boy, this is great. I'm going to entrust my data to the same folks that wrote (and then patched, then patched, then patched again, then patched yet again, and then patched still again, then patched the patch...) Outlook (as only one of MANY bletcherous examples)? You will have to pry my cold, dead fingers off my PC before I will let these hooligans stick some bug-ridden, flea-bitten ASIC in my computer. I agree with the sentiments of going G4/OS X if the PC architecture somehow gets infected by these dolts.

Actually, think about this a moment. Anyone else remember a proposed ASIC called Clipper? Yep, I don't think that went too far either. To me, it's the same thing. They tell you it's to enhance the security (whatever the hell that is in this context) of your data and your communications. But if you think about it, it seems like one huge backdoor for the hugest spyware project...implemented in hardware no less! MS is such a predatory company, is there anyone else who thinks they might take this opportunity to popup/popunder/spam/(insert your most annoying advert activity here) you, no matter what (because they have their fingers in your most basic level, your hardware)?

Besides...we already have a more secure IP for anyone who chooses to adopt it: IPv6. What makes anyone think they're going to have any better success implementing Palladium than the ones who are trying to spread IPv6?
--
English is a difficult enough language to interpret correctly when its rules are followed, let alone when a writer chooses not to follow those rules.

JAAulde
Web Developer
Premium,MVM
join:2001-05-09
Williamsport, MD
kudos:3

Didn't the entire industry demand this...?

Not to condone any of Microsoft's actions or anything, but for how long has the entire world been demanding of MS to get security concious? And now that they do (maybe too much) everybody is mad. It doesn't seem to matter what MS does--every body will still hate them. But, all those haters continue to make 'ol Bill richer and richer so he doesn't care.
--
Don't you see it? The events that unfold throughout the world every day? The prophecies that are being fulfilled? The time is near, the stage is being set! Are you ready? Have you accepted Him?

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

A tough sell? They don't have to sell it!!

They just need to force it upon you by creating it, and then bundling it into their OS'es and refusing to update their old OS'es. So, in no time, whether you like it or not, it quickly dominates..

... No, they don't need to "sell" it to anyone. They just can do it the MS way--- ram it down your throat, no opinion asked.

MrTangent

join:2001-12-28
Earth

Switch

I predict Palladium is going to be a resounding failure. Microsoft has continually proven that security comes last, with profit being their only motive. Along with Xbox's continuing failure, the "call home" activation feature of XP and the obvious monopoly situation -- and Mac OS X's clear superiority -- I believe Microsoft's days are numbered. Not to mention the flagrant holes and buggy software Microsoft releases. If Apple plays their cards right I think we'll see more and more new Mac users in coming years. They spent $75 million on the new Switch campaign. And no, none of the individuals in the commercials or ad campaign were paid. They're all people like me... people who are fed up with Microsoft's business practices and their buggy, insecure piece of shit operating systems.

Let me ask you this, would you put your trust in Microsoft?

••••••••••

marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:2

Anyone ever play Shadowrun?

Just try to tell me that this does not smack of the shadowrun supercorp future where an untraceable computer is an illegal computer?